Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by Ferret, Dec 5, 2002.
I know I can - and I did. Of course, you chose not to see it, ignore it maybe...I don't know...
Then, Darkstart, you're the purest of us all.
However, to live life so unknowing...that is blindness as well...
"tee hee hee"
(takes a bow)
"I thank and love you all! Im so glad you enjoyed my ranting, its gotten me everywhere in life!"
Maybe you missed the "blindness" part? <grin>
You see, you are living a life more pure than the rest of them, however, you have gotten nowhere thus far, because you see the pains, you see the injustice, you see it all...and you simply ignore it, not try to solve the mystery, see what is life in and out of itself. In a way, you are in your own "cult," the one that "does not care whatsoever..."
If you know what life is, please tell me!
On the contrary duke. To live unknowingly is an adventure, what life is comprised of. Perils, damsels in distress, fire breathing dragons, and mythical characters. Well... maybe not so much those things pursay... but I do see a higher presence in some people and things, so why not put a lil faith in them so that you can have something to look forward to or to follow when in angst? I know whenever I feel lost, confused, horny... my girl will always be there to comfort me in the perfect ways! So I may be blinded by the uncertaintity? But wouldnt I be blinded by her or anything else for that matter if all I do is keep my eyes fixed upon her/it and off the wandering path?
I have confused my self... time to drive to Codie's.... ttl guys... ill be gone a few hours
But where is your wandering path, that is - how do you find the beginning of it? Is it not by your experience, that you begin your wandering quest? At that point, is not experience limited by the very world you detest - the things you believe, the things you disbelieve, your pleasures and pains...are they not all implanted in you from the very beginning? Do they not serve as walls, limits of that strange path?
Or I suppose you can even let go of what society has taught you? Are you not living a life style that would fit you in your culture? Would you not detest living any other life style, along the lines of any other culture? If that is so, then you are not wandering, but simply following...
Would you not be blinded by anything, if you refuse to completely destroy and oppose your own beliefs? Even the wandering path becomes blinding...the euphoria it first reveals becomes a rotten, filthy decay after a while, when one wanders blindly...like any other cult, it becomes merely a meaningless ritual so as to not discover, but escape; not see, but un-see; not understand, but dismiss - is this the wandering path? One must have an ideal, any ideal, before taking such a leap...lest he travel blindly, unknowing where he going, lost, confused...
Just tell me this, do you see yourself marrying anyone?
the path is perpetual.... it doesnt appear and you dont find it... you are made unto it by the process of birth.... this is getting to complex for me now.... i need to go back to her house
I've been intentionally not contributing to this thread. Mostly because I don't agree with a lot of what is being said by either side (or should that be "any" side?).
Duke, I agree that you shouldn't blindly accept your fate or religion or whatever you want to call whatever it is you choose to believe. However, there is a difference between questioning your believes and throwing all cation to the wind also.
I can feel that something is true and not have to experience to oposite to know whether or not following is a good decision. In fact, some times, not doing so is harmful. For example, I believe that drugs are harmful. I'm generalizing a bit here, but by this, I am specifically speaking of non-prescribed substances that people take into their bodies without research. I believe that many of what we call drugs can have a positive effect if used properly, but that is not what I am referring to. I teach my children that the difference between a "drug" and a "medicine" is that the medicine is used to treat a specific symptom and is used within prescribed boundries. Anything else is a "drug" and is harmful.
Getting back to the point, if I am inferring properly, you would argue that I can't know that this believe is true unless I throw the believe away. Would you further argue that I should therefore take drugs and experiment in order to know whether or not this is something I should be believing in the first place?
Isn't seeing the effects on other people enough of a witness that what I am doing is correct in that regard? Without having to have the potentially long-term effects of a hard learned lesson myself?
I know you well enough to know that we won't agree on a lot of things. However, it's been a long standing understanding with us that we can agree to disagree. Regardless, I am interested to hear what you have to say on this matter. Perhaps I have not understood you properly up til now, or perhaps I can put a question in your mind that you may not have considered.
Oh Dear Eric! - I would enjoy it very much if you can insert a question, even an illusion of a sentence simply ending with a "?" into my thought!
Eric, what I have come to knowing, now, is that the differences we perceive are all valueless on universal levels, and only valuable here, now, in this moment, to you and I. I can, for example, conjure up a word, attribute offensive values to it, and watch the word become offending, watch it destroy somebody's feelings, make someone cry, another hate me. We can ask: is the word, of itself, offensive? No! Then by all means, why can a word, a simple, meaningless word, be able to obtain such a power? Notice how it, of itself, is powerless, and cannot be used to harm everyone simply because it obtains not a universal power. If a man's life is filled with such words, we can agree that such a man can easily get offended, even if secretly – the man, at that point, is a clown, being offended by nothing of any value.
If we are to take any example, and decipher it, that example will lead to the same exact problem, and the same exact outlook on life. Like I said: the differences we perceive are all too valueless, and therefore, equal, attributing to the same issues.
Let's consider your example of drug use. Indeed you need not try drugs to understand that they are a source of danger. However, you, at least, must be willing to question why anyone would be willing to go even criminal limits so as to infect himself with such a danger - why? Even with us shouting, screaming that drugs are dangerous, people do them anyway - why?
We live our lives tainted with desirable and undesirable beliefs - but it is critical to ask where are these beliefs desirable and undesirable - does what I do constitute an acceptable outlook only where I live, my locale, or is it worldly, or even, universal? Each new born, that is, each tragedy that enters the world, is instantly drowned in the sea of truths, of opinions – there is but a short chance of escape, of actually perceiving life as it is, not as it is colored. With religions like Islam and Christianity at our hands, for example, I am left wandering, confused, damaged by two sects that are supposed to be kind and faithful! Such a destructive power, that comes with each religion! The same goes with political beliefs, with simply any opinion that the world presents as a maxim, and absolute truth. I am left confused – left wanting of something irrefutable, something truthful at all – but such a thing is nowhere to be found. People submit to the “I agree” and “I disagree,” “wrong” and “right,” all righteousness that is not half-way righteous, unjust justice…each side whimpers, utters its nonsense, wanting to be heard…but by who? Everyone is caught up in this sea of sewage, where the individual is drowned never to rise again...
Within such a prison, there are means to calm the self, to ignore the stench, the filth, the immediate idiocy, the undermining – yes, indeed there are ways to, at least, ignore life, at that point. Sex is one of those ways – to have one’s mind occupied with everything sexual – it is simply pleasurable, and serves as the ultimate escape from life – the repressed individual finally has a small outlet to express something pure and real, something powerful with the ability to, temporarily, blind the individual to the painful light of society. Crime is also such an outlet – it is such a beautiful memory of something pure and actual – violence! Having being corrupted and undermined, one way of expressing the animal within would be to hurt another – to actually observe another’s pain, and enjoy the observation while it lasts – it reminds the individual of life, and presents him with something undeniable – that is pain. Drugs are but a small outlet, a small sect of what the individual can do to avoid confronting the presence of clowns and their foul words, rules, and chains on life. One may commit suicide, become a full time exotic dancer, be a rapist - all are justified beautifully at that point.
Another sect of society, as opposed to opposing the problem, they conjure up their own blind illusions of what is "right" and "wrong," simply to have a side, any side, to be a part of something, anything, as long as it is an escape, a paradise where one can rot as opposed to try to swim back to the shore, where life is wanting, needing, waiting to be embraced...
While I can agree, that drug users and criminals are caught up and lost – the ones to blame are us – the just, the uncriminal, the loving, the caring ones. We are the problem, and everything we do not find desirable universally comes back to us – we are the teachers of this filth, and we teach quite well. Sadly, that is the only thing we have been teaching for a long, long time.
Now, when you examine your drugs example - yes, while you know it is dangerous, you should also know that it is people who contribute to the problem - we shackle oursleves and everyone around us, and expect them not to express the human within? We have such high expectations, don't we!
Still, I do not feel that your example represents what I mean. What you describe is an action, what I describe is thought process. Of course, we can recall many examples where it is harmful to oppose one's own beliefs, that is if the belief requires action. But if the belief is simply of thought, surely one can think however he likes without harming anyone - and by that - one can oppose himself as much as he wants, yet still remaining in the state of "peace" he supposedly live.
Is it better to rot in one's own contentment, fearing to depart the home, the comfort that one decided to see, the joy that one simply conjured up so as to forget everything else?
You say that the example I give isn't exactly what you are trying to get at. And yet, it is a similitude and it has allowed you to express a view in a way that is easier to understand.
If I understand correctly, everything we do is, in some way or other, harmful to someone. Perhaps not everything, but the point is, at some level, there is a very pessimistic attitude about what life is. Pressure is put on the individual to succeed. Religions speak of moral laws and divine goals, governments of civil laws and financial goals, etc. It is impossible to obtain the full extent of the pressure that is placed on the individual, which leads to frustration and failure.
The human psycie isn't equipped to handle this and seeks some form of escape. Some choose drugs, others crime, and so forth. We are all to blame because we are all part of the pressure that is placed on the individual.
Am I at least warm here?
If this is what you are saying, then I think I can agree with you to that point. However, I think that each of the escapes you listed is a fleeting escape. It is an illusion of a reality that simply isn't so. I suppose that is what the individual is trying to do, however. They want to create that illusion. The problem is that the illusion isn't enough. I would argue that there are different degrees. For example, is it "worse" to shoplift a candy bar, or to rob a convenience store at gunpoint? Is it worse to view porn, or to rape? I don't know enough about drugs to give an example here, but I would submit that often, one escape leads to another. When the current escape isn't enough, the individual seeks greater "thrills" if you will. At first, the escape is introspective. Only the individual themselves is directly effected. Eventually, that isn't enough and obtaining the same level of escape involves other people and greater thrills.
But it's all illusion.
And the bottom line is, as much as you would like to blame it on society, I can't feel the same way. We are all under the same pressures ultimately. Some of us find ways to deal with pressure and/or become comfortable with the fact that there will be failures. The fact that not everyone becomes a criminal indicates that becoming a criminal is not a necessary consequence of life. Granted, what you are saying is that each person chooses there own form of escape, but if we are truely introspective, I think that we all know what the potential consequences are of the illusion we choose to create for ourselves.
That being the case, we are responsible for the actions we choose. Sure, you might conclude that adds additional pressure. What a spiral we have weaved here. But I think if you truely come to understand what it means, it can also be very liberating and refreshing. Personally, I would suggest that true joy can be found that is not an illusion.
This is not true. Logically speaking, it is specifically referred to as a "slippery slope" argument, when it is assumed that one thing leads to another, to another, until it explodes.
Of course it is an illusion, and I am so glad that you can make that observation! So what is not an illusion? Religion? Government? The valueless values we abide by, the very same origin that motivates the drugs, the crime, the violence that one detests?
There are 2 types of illusionists:
The illusionists who tries to sniff what little life that is allowed to be experienced - these people find their outlets in drugs, crime, and sex. The other is the kind that dismisses life completely, and gambles on a desire of, a hope for, a wanting to live another life, in a Heaven, under a God; or, follow the government as a god; creating tons of morals, and thus, influencing more pressure on the first type of illusionists. In turn, the "bad" illusionists "strikes" back with more drugs, more crime, and more sexual activities...trying, now, harder to get a grasp of life. Consequently, they force the illusionist moralists to create more rules, follow even more blindly, hence, now, they think they see "more" damaging acts, more harm...and so they hold on even more to what they think is right. Each illusion empowers the other…the more illusions we conjure up, the more power we have attributed to all others. The belief in God becomes stronger as one ages, not because he becomes more wise, but because he becomes exhausted; government becomes less questioned, not because it is righteous, but because it leads its people to believe that they are living the maximum life, not the limited, enslaved version. Morals become more beautiful, laws more followed, “right” and “wrong” become more solidified…and thus, the perspective of other cultures and societies, other ways of life, other religions and governments become something like we behold now: each is patriotic, unwilling, xenophobic, fearful, even, of life itself…
The cycle goes on...
The tension will eventually break, resulting in the end of society and culture, if not mankind on Earth. We are headed there...
Indeed it is not in illusions! The problem, now, seems to identify what is an illusion and what is not. Religion is an illusion. Government is an illusion. The way society perceives Love is an illusion. Morals are an illusion. Time is an illusion. You can disagree...of course, but, I could disagree as well. I ask you to see: who is more righteous, universally speaking?
A local religion? Or no religion? Which would we more likely experience if life was all in one moment, beyond time and space, throughout the whole universe - religion or no religion? The same thing applies to all illusions...
Eric, you say many refreshing things to hear - many things that are pleasant to the ear...but knowing your life style, I sense a contradiction between what you say and what you live, and therefore, I am lead to the realm of confusion once more, where I would have to “liberate” myself by making enemies, choosing a “side.” Would I not be an illusionist at that point; of “enemies” and “friends” we experience, how friendly are our friends, and how evil are our enemies? What an illusion! That is the problem - the tension between thoughts and life...
Indeed I have. From what you can see, it seems that I explained something very nicely, when contrarily, I have not even began to explaining all my thoughts as I think them - you actually caged me with your example Eric, and what you see is but a sliver of what I would have liked to express. However, it is fitting to at least make it more clear to you if no one else. As long as it is clear to you...
Another philosophy-off has begun! Ladies and gentlemen, get out that Visine and get ready to read page upon page of meaninglessness!
Or, you can go do something more constructive, more thoughtful, more meaningful - that's right - go play Diablo, or whatever video game you worship, go sit in your corner and laugh at us losers over here...
...don't hurt your brain and contribute to this meaningless.
That's sound advice, except for the "worship" part. Kinda makes you sound superior, which as we all know by know you are not.
man duke.... you just cant get over the fact that since i dont belive... i made a stupid decision or something... i dont need truth... i dont need order... i just do what i feel best... and woshipping something that will never give back to me, just isnt on that agenda... and i think thats how a lot of people feel...
/me gets dizzy, becomes sick and facefaults, becoming unconscious.
FmK-AnC, that's fine. Do believe whatever you want to believe, but don't expect to introduce your rather "strange" (that's a euphemism) opinion without me, at least, trying to see the origin of it. When I did inquire further of your belief, you appeared to me as a mess of contradictions. Unlike some people, who simply whine about others who contradict themselves, I have taken the time and shown you how your views conflict with each other - you simply rather not to listen - that's fine. I have clearly shown you the indifference between the atheist and the religious - you rejected it completely, unwilling to even argue your case. I can further explain the indifferences...but why?
Like I said...at the moment, you are blinded by the joy, the contentment in even having a belief - it gives you a sense of identity. I do not blame you - that's how most people are. If you're willing to show me where I'm wrong as opposed to simply whimper your noise of "no, no, no!", than I'm willing to entertain the ideas you might present. Otherwise, I believe that you have introduced your opinion to us, and since you do not want to back your case, and instead you add more debris of a simple opinion, why fill the atmosphere with more noise?
"Anyone can introduce his opinion, anyone can say 'I disagree,' anyone may 'agree,' anyone may get mad, may hate - but there are few willing to go above and beyond these sad states of communication...few willing to at least try to justify..."
Chaos Turtle - well, some of us worship games, some hatred, and others, knoweldge. It's up to you to define whom is "inferior" and "superior." But, hey, like all my words are simply my opinion, the power you attribute to "inferiority" and "superiority" will be all yours to perceive, follow, and by thus make your judgements. The matter of itself would remain unchanged...no matter how different you wish it to be - unless you back up your observation with more than a mere opinion.
Quote Mr Marilyn Manson:
"Im not a slave to a God that doesnt exist, Im not a slave to a world that doesnt give a ****"
Good enuff for me... altho i dont need trendy cross dressing rock stars to make decisions for me. I decided both a long time ago on my own.
What's the difference between you and anyone else who claims to be doing things on "their own?" Does not everyone believe that they are doing things on their own?
The Christian does. The Muslim does. The politician does. The unbeliever does. The criminal does. Who does not? Why do you even need to state something that is, supposedly, obvious?
Or is there an ability to be not of one's "own?" And if so, I would like to hear of that state of existence, so I can observe if you are "of your own."
Otherwise, claim whatever the heck you like to claim...
I claim the Mississippi River.
Separate names with a comma.